Impact of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 vaccination on the subsequent incidence of COVID-19: a multicentre prospective cohort study among UK healthcare workers - the SIREN (Sarscov2 Immunity & REinfection EvaluatioN) study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Understanding the effectiveness and durability of protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection conferred by previous infection and COVID-19 is essential to inform ongoing management of the pandemic. This study aims to determine whether prior SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 vaccination in healthcare workers protects against future infection. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a prospective cohort study design in staff members working in hospitals in the UK. At enrolment, participants are allocated into cohorts, positive or naïve, dependent on their prior SARS-CoV-2 infection status, as measured by standardised SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing on all baseline serum samples and previous SARS-CoV-2 test results. Participants undergo monthly antibody testing and fortnightly viral RNA testing during follow-up and based on these results may move between cohorts. Any results from testing undertaken for other reasons (eg, symptoms, contact tracing) or prior to study entry will also be captured. Individuals complete enrolment and fortnightly questionnaires on exposures, symptoms and vaccination. Follow-up is 12 months from study entry, with an option to extend follow-up to 24 months.The primary outcome of interest is infection with SARS-CoV-2 after previous SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 vaccination during the study period. Secondary outcomes include incidence and prevalence (both RNA and antibody) of SARS-CoV-2, viral genomics, viral culture, symptom history and antibody/neutralising antibody titres. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by the Berkshire Research Ethics Committee, Health Research Authority (IRAS ID 284460, REC reference 20/SC/0230) on 22 May 2020; the vaccine amendment was approved on 12 January 2021. Participants gave informed consent before taking part in the study.Regular reports to national and international expert advisory groups and peer-reviewed publications ensure timely dissemination of findings to inform decision making. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN11041050.

The half-life of maternal transplacental antibodies against diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis in infants: an individual participant data meta-analysis.

AIM: There are few reliable estimates of the half-lives of maternal antibodies to the antigens found in the primary series vaccines. We aimed to calculate the half-lives of passively acquired diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis (DTP) antibodies in infants. We aimed to determine whether decay rates varied according to country, maternal age, gestational age, birthweight, World Bank income classifications, or vaccine received by the mother during pregnancy. METHODS: De-identified data from infants born to women taking part in 10 studies, in 9 countries (UK, Belgium, Thailand, Vietnam, Canada, Pakistan, USA, Guatemala and the Netherlands) were combined in an individual participant data meta-analysis. Blood samples were taken at two timepoints before any DTP-containing vaccines were received by the infant: at birth and at 2-months of age. Decay rates for each antigen were log2-transformed and a mixed effects model was applied. Half-lives were calculated by taking the reciprocal of the absolute value of the mean decay rates. RESULTS: Data from 1426 mother-infant pairs were included in the analysis. The half-lives of the 6 antigen-specific maternal antibodies of interest were similar, with point estimates ranging from 28.7 (95% CI: 24.4 - 35) days for tetanus toxoid antibodies to 35.1 (95% CI: 30.7 - 41.1) days for pertactin antibodies. The decay of maternal antibodies did not significantly differ by maternal age, gestational age, birthweight, maternal vaccination status or type of vaccine administered. CONCLUSION: Maternal antibodies decay at different rates for the different antigens; however, the magnitude of the difference is small. Decay rates are not modified by key demographic or vaccine characteristics.

Adenovirus vectors activate Vδ2+ γδT cells in a type I interferon-, TNF-, and IL-18-dependent manner.

Vδ2+ γδT cells are unconventional T cells that can be activated by cytokines without TCR signaling. Adenovirus vaccine vectors activated Vδ2+ γδT cells in an interleukin 18-, TNF-, and type I interferon-dependent manner. This stimulatory capacity was associated with adenovirus vectors of non-species C origin, including the ChAdOx1 vaccine platform.

COVID-19 vaccine coverage in health-care workers in England and effectiveness of BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine against infection (SIREN): a prospective, multicentre, cohort study.

BACKGROUND: BNT162b2 mRNA and ChAdOx1 nCOV-19 adenoviral vector vaccines have been rapidly rolled out in the UK from December, 2020. We aimed to determine the factors associated with vaccine coverage for both vaccines and documented the vaccine effectiveness of the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine in a cohort of health-care workers undergoing regular asymptomatic testing. METHODS: The SIREN study is a prospective cohort study among staff (aged ≥18 years) working in publicly-funded hospitals in the UK. Participants were assigned into either the positive cohort (antibody positive or history of infection [indicated by previous positivity of antibody or PCR tests]) or the negative cohort (antibody negative with no previous positive test) at the beginning of the follow-up period. Baseline risk factors were collected at enrolment, symptom status was collected every 2 weeks, and vaccination status was collected through linkage to the National Immunisations Management System and questionnaires. Participants had fortnightly asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 PCR testing and monthly antibody testing, and all tests (including symptomatic testing) outside SIREN were captured. Data cutoff for this analysis was Feb 5, 2021. The follow-up period was Dec 7, 2020, to Feb 5, 2021. The primary outcomes were vaccinated participants (binary ever vacinated variable; indicated by at least one vaccine dose recorded by at least one of the two vaccination data sources) for the vaccine coverage analysis and SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed by a PCR test for the vaccine effectiveness analysis. We did a mixed-effect logistic regression analysis to identify factors associated with vaccine coverage. We used a piecewise exponential hazard mixed-effects model (shared frailty-type model) using a Poisson distribution to calculate hazard ratios to compare time-to-infection in unvaccinated and vaccinated participants and estimate the impact of the BNT162b2 vaccine on all PCR-positive infections (asymptomatic and symptomatic). This study is registered with ISRCTN, number ISRCTN11041050, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: 23 324 participants from 104 sites (all in England) met the inclusion criteria for this analysis and were enrolled. Included participants had a median age of 46·1 years (IQR 36·0-54·1) and 19 692 (84%) were female; 8203 (35%) were assigned to the positive cohort at the start of the analysis period, and 15 121 (65%) assigned to the negative cohort. Total follow-up time was 2 calendar months and 1 106 905 person-days (396 318 vaccinated and 710 587 unvaccinated). Vaccine coverage was 89% on Feb 5, 2021, 94% of whom had BNT162b2 vaccine. Significantly lower coverage was associated with previous infection, gender, age, ethnicity, job role, and Index of Multiple Deprivation score. During follow-up, there were 977 new infections in the unvaccinated cohort, an incidence density of 14 infections per 10 000 person-days; the vaccinated cohort had 71 new infections 21 days or more after their first dose (incidence density of eight infections per 10 000 person-days) and nine infections 7 days after the second dose (incidence density four infections per 10 000 person-days). In the unvaccinated cohort, 543 (56%) participants had typical COVID-19 symptoms and 140 (14%) were asymptomatic on or 14 days before their PCR positive test date, compared with 29 (36%) with typical COVID-19 symptoms and 15 (19%) asymptomatic in the vaccinated cohort. A single dose of BNT162b2 vaccine showed vaccine effectiveness of 70% (95% CI 55-85) 21 days after first dose and 85% (74-96) 7 days after two doses in the study population. INTERPRETATION: Our findings show that the BNT162b2 vaccine can prevent both symptomatic and asymptomatic infection in working-age adults. This cohort was vaccinated when the dominant variant in circulation was B1.1.7 and shows effectiveness against this variant. FUNDING: Public Health England, UK Department of Health and Social Care, and the National Institute for Health Research.

SARS-CoV-2 infection rates of antibody-positive compared with antibody-negative health-care workers in England: a large, multicentre, prospective cohort study (SIREN).

BACKGROUND: Increased understanding of whether individuals who have recovered from COVID-19 are protected from future SARS-CoV-2 infection is an urgent requirement. We aimed to investigate whether antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 were associated with a decreased risk of symptomatic and asymptomatic reinfection. METHODS: A large, multicentre, prospective cohort study was done, with participants recruited from publicly funded hospitals in all regions of England. All health-care workers, support staff, and administrative staff working at hospitals who could remain engaged in follow-up for 12 months were eligible to join The SARS-CoV-2 Immunity and Reinfection Evaluation study. Participants were excluded if they had no PCR tests after enrolment, enrolled after Dec 31, 2020, or had insufficient PCR and antibody data for cohort assignment. Participants attended regular SARS-CoV-2 PCR and antibody testing (every 2-4 weeks) and completed questionnaires every 2 weeks on symptoms and exposures. At enrolment, participants were assigned to either the positive cohort (antibody positive, or previous positive PCR or antibody test) or negative cohort (antibody negative, no previous positive PCR or antibody test). The primary outcome was a reinfection in the positive cohort or a primary infection in the negative cohort, determined by PCR tests. Potential reinfections were clinically reviewed and classified according to case definitions (confirmed, probable, or possible) and symptom-status, depending on the hierarchy of evidence. Primary infections in the negative cohort were defined as a first positive PCR test and seroconversions were excluded when not associated with a positive PCR test. A proportional hazards frailty model using a Poisson distribution was used to estimate incidence rate ratios (IRR) to compare infection rates in the two cohorts. FINDINGS: From June 18, 2020, to Dec 31, 2020, 30 625 participants were enrolled into the study. 51 participants withdrew from the study, 4913 were excluded, and 25 661 participants (with linked data on antibody and PCR testing) were included in the analysis. Data were extracted from all sources on Feb 5, 2021, and include data up to and including Jan 11, 2021. 155 infections were detected in the baseline positive cohort of 8278 participants, collectively contributing 2 047 113 person-days of follow-up. This compares with 1704 new PCR positive infections in the negative cohort of 17 383 participants, contributing 2 971 436 person-days of follow-up. The incidence density was 7·6 reinfections per 100 000 person-days in the positive cohort, compared with 57·3 primary infections per 100 000 person-days in the negative cohort, between June, 2020, and January, 2021. The adjusted IRR was 0·159 for all reinfections (95% CI 0·13-0·19) compared with PCR-confirmed primary infections. The median interval between primary infection and reinfection was more than 200 days. INTERPRETATION: A previous history of SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with an 84% lower risk of infection, with median protective effect observed 7 months following primary infection. This time period is the minimum probable effect because seroconversions were not included. This study shows that previous infection with SARS-CoV-2 induces effective immunity to future infections in most individuals. FUNDING: Department of Health and Social Care of the UK Government, Public Health England, The National Institute for Health Research, with contributions from the Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish governments.

MAIT cell activation augments adenovirus vector vaccine immunogenicity.

Mucosal-associated invariant T (MAIT) cells are innate sensors of viruses and can augment early immune responses and contribute to protection. We hypothesized that MAIT cells may have inherent adjuvant activity in vaccine platforms that use replication-incompetent adenovirus vectors. In mice and humans, ChAdOx1 (chimpanzee adenovirus Ox1) immunization robustly activated MAIT cells. Activation required plasmacytoid dendritic cell (pDC)-derived interferon (IFN)-α and monocyte-derived interleukin-18. IFN-α-induced, monocyte-derived tumor necrosis factor was also identified as a key secondary signal. All three cytokines were required in vitro and in vivo. Activation of MAIT cells positively correlated with vaccine-induced T cell responses in human volunteers and MAIT cell-deficient mice displayed impaired CD8+ T cell responses to multiple vaccine-encoded antigens. Thus, MAIT cells contribute to the immunogenicity of adenovirus vectors, with implications for vaccine design.

Knowledge, attitudes and practices towards yaws and yaws-like skin disease in Ghana.

INTRODUCTION: Yaws is endemic in Ghana. The World Health Organization (WHO) has launched a new global eradication campaign based on total community mass treatment with azithromycin. Achieving high coverage of mass treatment will be fundamental to the success of this new strategy; coverage is dependent, in part, on appropriate community mobilisation. An understanding of community knowledge, attitudes and practices related to yaws in Ghana and other endemic countries will be vital in designing effective community engagement strategies. METHODS: A verbally administered questionnaire was administered to residents in 3 districts in the Eastern region of Ghana where a randomised trial on the treatment of yaws was being conducted. The questionnaire combined both quantitative and qualitative questions covering perceptions of the cause and mechanisms of transmission of yaws-like lesions, the providers from which individuals would seek healthcare for yaws-like lesions, and what factors were important in reaching decisions on where to seek care. Chi-square tests and logistic regression were used to assess relationships between reported knowledge, attitudes and practices, and demographic variables. Thematic analysis of qualitative data was used to identify common themes. RESULTS: A total of 1,162 individuals participated. The majority of individuals (n = 895, 77%) reported that "germs" were the cause of yaws lesions. Overall 13% (n = 161) of respondents believed that the disease was caused by supernatural forces. Participants frequently mentioned lack of personal hygiene, irregular and inefficient bathing, and washing with dirty water as fundamental to both the cause and the prevention of yaws. A majority of individuals reported that they would want to take an antibiotic to prevent the development of yaws if they were asymptomatic (n = 689, 61.2%), but a substantial minority reported they would not want to do so. A majority of individuals (n = 839, 72.7%) reported that if they had a yaws-like skin lesion they would seek care from a doctor or nurse. Both direct and indirect costs of treatment were reported as key factors affecting where participants reported they would seek care. DISCUSSION: This is the first study that has explored community knowledge, attitudes and practices in relation to yaws in any endemic population. The belief that 'germs' are in some way related to disease through a variety of transmission routes including both contact and dirty water are similar to those reported for other skin diseases in Ghana. The prominent role of private healthcare providers is an important finding of this study and suggests engagement with this sector will be important in yaws eradication efforts. Strategies to address the substantial minority of individuals who reported they would not take treatment for yaws if they were currently asymptomatic will be needed to ensure the success of yaws eradication efforts. The data collected will be of value to the Ghana Health Service and also to WHO and other partners, who are currently developing community mobilisation tools to support yaws eradication efforts worldwide.